Lately, I have been in discussions with a few credit unions, where they have asked for peer comparison. 

It can be useful to compare the maturity of your data analytics program with your peers to see where you stand in terms of your capabilities and how you can potentially learn from their successes and challenges. However, it is important to also consider the specific needs and goals of your organization and not solely rely on peer comparisons. It is also important to ensure that any comparisons are based on valid and comparable metrics and not just superficial measures. 

There are pros and cons to doing a peer comparison of the data analytics program maturity of your credit union with peer credit unions. 

Pros

• Peer comparison can help you understand where your credit union stands in relation to others in terms of data analytics program maturity. This can provide valuable insight into your strengths and weaknesses and help you identify areas for improvement.
• Peer comparison can also serve as a benchmark, helping you set goals and targets for your data analytics program.
• Comparing your credit union's data analytics program with those of peers can also provide valuable insights into best practices and successful strategies that you can learn from and potentially adopt in your own organization.

Cons

• Peer comparison may not always be an accurate or fair reflection of your credit union's data analytics program, as every organization is unique and has its own set of challenges and opportunities.
• Peer comparison may also create a sense of competition or pressure, which may not always be productive or healthy for your credit union.
• It is important to remember that the goal of your data analytics program is to drive business value and improve outcomes for your credit union and its members rather than simply striving to be the best compared to others.

Peer comparison can be a useful way to gauge the relative maturity of your organization's data analytics program compared to other similar organizations. However, it's important to take such comparisons with a pinch of salt for a few reasons. First, every organization is unique and has its own set of challenges, resources, and goals. This means that it's difficult to make an apples-to-apples comparison between different organizations. Second, peer comparison can be misleading because it's often difficult to get a complete and accurate picture of what's happening in other organizations. Finally, peer comparison can be demoralizing if your organization falls behind your peers, and it can lead to complacency if you're ahead of your peers. It's important to focus on making progress and improving your own organization rather than trying to keep up with or surpass your peers.